46 New York opinions name it 5 courts 1944–2024 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Liberman v. Gelsteingreen2 sentences2016The court correctly granted dismissal of so much of the causes of action alleging defamation as were predicated on the remaining statements which were not subject to the statute of limitations, as those statements were either insufficiently pleaded, constituted nonactionable opinion, or were subject to the defense of qualified privilege (see Mann v Abel, 10 NY3d 271, 276 [2008]; Liberman v Gelstein, 80 NY2d 429, 437 [1992]; Weiner v Doubleday & Co., 74 NY2d 586, 593 [1989]; Stillman v Ford, 22 NY2d 48, 53 [1968]; Neroni v Follender, 137 AD3d 1336, 1338 [2016]; Skarren v Household Fin. 2012Petitioner failed to defeat the defense of qualified privilege by demonstrating that Yearsley made the statements in question with malice (see generally Liberman, 80 NY2d at 437-439 ; Kondo-Dresser v Buffalo Pub. | 5 | 13 |
Stillman v. Fordgreen2 sentences2016The court correctly granted dismissal of so much of the causes of action alleging defamation as were predicated on the remaining statements which were not subject to the statute of limitations, as those statements were either insufficiently pleaded, constituted nonactionable opinion, or were subject to the defense of qualified privilege (see Mann v Abel, 10 NY3d 271, 276 [2008]; Liberman v Gelstein, 80 NY2d 429, 437 [1992]; Weiner v Doubleday & Co., 74 NY2d 586, 593 [1989]; Stillman v Ford, 22 NY2d 48, 53 [1968]; Neroni v Follender, 137 AD3d 1336, 1338 [2016]; Skarren v Household Fin. 1989Plan, supra, at 61; see also, Stillman v Ford, 22 NY2d 48, 53). | 3 | 4 |
Foster v. Churchillgreen2 sentences2006The defense of qualified privilege will be defeated, however, where it is demonstrated that the defendant’s statements were uttered with malice, which includes either common-law malice (motivated by spite or ill will) or constitutional malice (statements made with a high degree of awareness of their probable falsity) (Foster, 87 NY2d at 751-752 ). 2006The defense of qualified privilege will be defeated, however, where it is demonstrated that the defendant’s statements were uttered with malice, which includes either common-law malice (motivated by spite or ill will) or constitutional malice (statements made with a high degree of awareness of their falsity) {Foster, 87 NY2d at 751-752 ). | 2 | 4 |
Shapiro v. Health Insurance Plan of Greater New Yorkgreen2 sentences1989Plan, supra, at 61; see also, Stillman v Ford, 22 NY2d 48, 53). 1987Plan, 7 NY2d 56 ). | 2 | 4 |
People v. Cruzgreen2 sentences2013Here, plaintiff alleged that Caldwell’s actions were made in bad faith, thus precluding application of the defense of qualified immunity at this stage of the litigation (cf. Arzeno v Mack, 39 AD3d 341, 342 [2007]). 2013Here, plaintiff alleged that Caldwell’s actions were made in bad faith, thus precluding application of the defense of qualified immunity at this stage of the litigation (cf. Arzeno v Mack, 39 AD3d 341, 342 [2007]). | 2 | 3 |
Kondo-Dresser v. Buffalo Public Schoolsgreen2 sentences2012Schools, 17 AD3d 1114, 1115 [2005]). 2012Schools, 17 AD3d 1114, 1115 [2005]). | 2 | 3 |
Park Knoll Associates v. Schmidtgreen2 sentences2024Plaintiff’s complaint thus must contain “sufficient allegations of malice to withstand the motion to dismiss” when a defense of qualified privilege is raised (Park Knoll Assoc. v Schmidt, 59 NY2d 205, 210 [1983]). 1996The defense of qualified privilege will be defeated by demonstrating a defendant spoke with malice ("The shield provided *752 by a qualified privilege may be dissolved if plaintiff can demonstrate that defendant spoke with 'malice' " [Liberman, supra, at 437 ; see also, Park Knoll Assocs. v Schmidt, 59 NY2d, at 209 , supra]). | 2 | 2 |
Stukuls v. State of New Yorkgreen2 sentences2005Here, Morrell was protected by a qualified privilege in communicating the performance evaluation to defendant Marion Cañedo, the Superintendent of the School (see Stukuls v State of New York, 42 NY2d 272, 278-279 [1977]). 1997Moreover, even if the statements were not covered by absolute privilege, the defense of qualified privilege applied (see, Stukuls v State of New York, 42 NY2d 272 ; Paskiewicz v National Assn. for Advancement of Colored People, 216 AD2d 550 ). | 1 | 3 |
Rosenberg v. MetLife, Inc.green1 sentence2019"Generally, a statement is subject to a qualified privilege when it is fairly made by a person in the discharge of some public or private duty, legal or moral, or in the conduct of his [or her] own affairs, in a matter where his [or her] interest is concerned" ( Rosenberg v MetLife, Inc. , 8 NY3d 359, 365 [2007] [internal quotation marks omitted]). | 1 | 1 |
Neroni v. Follendergreen1 sentence2016The court correctly granted dismissal of so much of the causes of action alleging defamation as were predicated on the remaining statements which were not subject to the statute of limitations, as those statements were either insufficiently pleaded, constituted nonactionable opinion, or were subject to the defense of qualified privilege (see Mann v Abel, 10 NY3d 271, 276 [2008]; Liberman v Gelstein, 80 NY2d 429, 437 [1992]; Weiner v Doubleday & Co., 74 NY2d 586, 593 [1989]; Stillman v Ford, 22 NY2d 48, 53 [1968]; Neroni v Follender, 137 AD3d 1336, 1338 [2016]; Skarren v Household Fin. | 1 | 1 |
Mann v. Abelgreen1 sentence2016The court correctly granted dismissal of so much of the causes of action alleging defamation as were predicated on the remaining statements which were not subject to the statute of limitations, as those statements were either insufficiently pleaded, constituted nonactionable opinion, or were subject to the defense of qualified privilege (see Mann v Abel, 10 NY3d 271, 276 [2008]; Liberman v Gelstein, 80 NY2d 429, 437 [1992]; Weiner v Doubleday & Co., 74 NY2d 586, 593 [1989]; Stillman v Ford, 22 NY2d 48, 53 [1968]; Neroni v Follender, 137 AD3d 1336, 1338 [2016]; Skarren v Household Fin. | 1 | 1 |
Skarren v. Household Finance Corp.green1 sentence2016Corp., 296 AD2d 488, 489 [2002]). | 1 | 1 |
Weiner v. Doubleday & Co.green1 sentence2016The court correctly granted dismissal of so much of the causes of action alleging defamation as were predicated on the remaining statements which were not subject to the statute of limitations, as those statements were either insufficiently pleaded, constituted nonactionable opinion, or were subject to the defense of qualified privilege (see Mann v Abel, 10 NY3d 271, 276 [2008]; Liberman v Gelstein, 80 NY2d 429, 437 [1992]; Weiner v Doubleday & Co., 74 NY2d 586, 593 [1989]; Stillman v Ford, 22 NY2d 48, 53 [1968]; Neroni v Follender, 137 AD3d 1336, 1338 [2016]; Skarren v Household Fin. | 1 | 1 |
Hanlin v. Sternlichtgreen1 sentence2012Although the defense of qualified privilege will be defeated by demonstrating that a defendant spoke with malice (id. at 752), plaintiff failed to adduce evidentiary facts sufficient to permit such an inference (Hanlin v Sternlicht, 6 AD3d 334, 334-335 [2004]). | 1 | 1 |
Aurora Loan Services, LLC v. Thomasgreen1 sentence2010Motions for leave to amend pleadings should be freely granted, absent prejudice or surprise directly resulting from the delay in seeking leave, unless the proposed amendment is palpably insufficient or patently devoid of merit (see CPLR 3025 [b]; Aurora Loan Servs., LLC v Thomas, 70 AD3d 986, 987 [2010]; Tyson v Tower Ins. | 1 | 1 |
In re the Arbitration between Allcity/Empire Insurance & Massillongreen1 sentence2007For the purpose of any proceeding, civil or criminal, the good faith of any person, official, or institution required to report cases of child abuse or maltreatment or providing a service pursuant to section four hundred twenty-four or the disclosure of child protective services information in compliance with sections twenty, four hundred twenty-two and four hundred twenty-two-a of this chapter shall be presumed, provided such person, official or institution was acting in discharge of their duties within the scope of their employment, and that such liability did not result from the willful mis | 1 | 1 |
| Palmer v. Sandersongreen | 1 | 1 |
| Landy v. Irizarrygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Schulman v. Anderson Russell Kill & Olick, P. C.green | 1 | 1 |
| Garson v. Hendlingreen | 1 | 1 |
| Ostrowe v. Leegreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Brown v. State
green
2 sentences2013Here, defendant did not raise the defense of qualified immunity in its answer to the claim or at trial (cf. Brown, 79 AD3d at 1580 ) and, in any event, defendant failed to establish that the decision to armor coat the entrance ramp and only part of the shoulder, rather than to resurface the entrance ramp including the entire shoulder, resulted from any study. 2013Here, defendant did not raise the defense of qualified immunity in its answer to the claim or at trial (cf. Brown, 79 AD3d at 1580 ) and, in any event, defendant failed to establish that the decision to armor coat the entrance ramp and only part of the shoulder, rather than to resurface the entrance ramp including the entire shoulder, resulted from any study. | 3 | 2013–2013 |
Teichner v. Bellan
green
2 sentences1982The defense of absolute privilege was properly stricken because no fair inference can be drawn from the complaint that plaintiff instigated or consented to the alleged defamatory statement (see Teichner v Bellan, 7 AD2d 247 ; Wells v Belstrat Hotel Corp., 212 App Div 366 ). 1975(Teichner v Bellan, 7 AD2d 247, 252 ; Duffy v Kipers, 26 AD2d 127, 129 .) However, as previously stated, the State does not, as yet, have to serve an answer and plead an affirmative defense. | 2 | 1975–1982 |
Ashcroft v. . Hammond
green
2 sentences1978Plan, 7 N Y 2d 56, 60, supra), 'actual ill-will’ (Ashcroft v. Hammond, 197 N. Y. 488, 495 , supra) or 'personal spite * * * or culpable recklessness or negligence’ ” (Stillman v Ford, 22 NY2d 48, 53 ). 1958The judgments in Ashcroft v. Hammond ( 197 N. Y. 488 , supra); Bowsky v. Cimiotti Unhairing Co. ( 72 App. Div. 172 ) and Haft v. First Nat. | 2 | 1958–1978 |
Crawford v. Village of Millbrook
green
1 sentence2020No liability will attach unless the alleged negligence of the municipality in maintaining its roads is a proximate cause of the accident'" ( Crawford v Village of Millbrook , 94 AD3d 1036, 1038 , quoting Levi v Kratovac , 35 AD3d 548, 549 ). "[A]s long as a highway is reasonably safe for those who obey the rules of the road, the duty of the municipality is satisfied" ( Levi v Kratovac , 35 AD3d at 549 ). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Levi v. Kratovac
green
2 sentences2020No liability will attach unless the alleged negligence of the municipality in maintaining its roads is a proximate cause of the accident'" ( Crawford v Village of Millbrook , 94 AD3d 1036, 1038 , quoting Levi v Kratovac , 35 AD3d 548, 549 ). "[A]s long as a highway is reasonably safe for those who obey the rules of the road, the duty of the municipality is satisfied" ( Levi v Kratovac , 35 AD3d at 549 ). 2020No liability will attach unless the alleged negligence of the municipality in maintaining its roads is a proximate cause of the accident'" ( Crawford v Village of Millbrook , 94 AD3d 1036, 1038 , quoting Levi v Kratovac , 35 AD3d 548, 549 ). "[A]s long as a highway is reasonably safe for those who obey the rules of the road, the duty of the municipality is satisfied" ( Levi v Kratovac , 35 AD3d at 549 ). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Bednoski v. County of Suffolk
neutral
1 sentence2020Since the County failed to demonstrate that the design of County Road 48 and any subsequent alterations to it were the result of deliberate governmental decision-making which considered the risks relevant to this action, we agree with the Supreme Court's determination that the County was not entitled to summary judgment based upon a defense of qualified immunity ( see Bednoski v County of Suffolk , 145 AD3d 943, 944 ). " The liability of a municipality begins and ends with the fulfillment of its duty to construct and maintain its highways in a reasonably safe condition. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Colao v. Mills
green
1 sentence2005Moreover, contrary to the defendants’ contention, the factual allegations in the complaint did not establish that the defense of qualified immunity applies (see Colao v Mills, 3 AD3d 702 [2004]; Kubik v New York State Dept. of Social Servs., 278 AD2d 644 [2000]). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Hilltop Nyack Corp. v. TRMI Holdings, Inc.
green
1 sentence2005The motion was made prior to the conclusion of discovery and the plaintiff failed to demonstrate any prejudice (see USA Nutritionals v Pharmalife, Inc., 293 AD2d 526 [2002]; Hilltop Nyack Corp. v TRMI Holdings, 275 AD2d 440 [2000]). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Kubik v. New York State Department of Social Services
green
1 sentence2005Moreover, contrary to the defendants’ contention, the factual allegations in the complaint did not establish that the defense of qualified immunity applies (see Colao v Mills, 3 AD3d 702 [2004]; Kubik v New York State Dept. of Social Servs., 278 AD2d 644 [2000]). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
USA Nutritionals, Inc. v. Pharmalife, Inc.
neutral
1 sentence2005The motion was made prior to the conclusion of discovery and the plaintiff failed to demonstrate any prejudice (see USA Nutritionals v Pharmalife, Inc., 293 AD2d 526 [2002]; Hilltop Nyack Corp. v TRMI Holdings, 275 AD2d 440 [2000]). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Conciatori v. Longworth
green
2 sentences2001Furthermore, the defendant established that it was entitled to summary judgment on the defense of qualified immunity because Shepherd’s statements were communicated only to persons with a common interest in the subject matter of the communication (see, Conciatori v. Longworth, 259 AD2d 459 ). 2001In opposition, the claimant failed to present evidentiary proof sufficient to demonstrate that the defendant’s statements were motivated by malice (see, Liberman v Gelstein, 80 NY2d 429 ; Conciatori v Longworth, supra). | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Cummins v. County of Onondaga
green
1 sentence2000With regard to the absence of guardrails, the City has failed to establish its entitlement to a defense of qualified immunity (see, Friedman v State of New York, 67 NY2d 271, 284 ) as a matter of law, since it has not identified any evidence in the record showing that the absence of guardrails was the result of a deliberative decision-making process reflecting the construction standards of the time the roadway was originally designed, or that the continuing absence of guardrails over the years resulted from the City’s periodic review of its decision not to use them in light of experience gaine | 1 | 2000–2000 |
| Friedman v. State of New York green | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Cummins v. County of Onondaga
green
1 sentence2000With regard to the absence of guardrails, the City has failed to establish its entitlement to a defense of qualified immunity (see, Friedman v State of New York, 67 NY2d 271, 284 ) as a matter of law, since it has not identified any evidence in the record showing that the absence of guardrails was the result of a deliberative decision-making process reflecting the construction standards of the time the roadway was originally designed, or that the continuing absence of guardrails over the years resulted from the City’s periodic review of its decision not to use them in light of experience gaine | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Appelbaum v. County of Sullivan
green
1 sentence2000With regard to the absence of guardrails, the City has failed to establish its entitlement to a defense of qualified immunity (see, Friedman v State of New York, 67 NY2d 271, 284 ) as a matter of law, since it has not identified any evidence in the record showing that the absence of guardrails was the result of a deliberative decision-making process reflecting the construction standards of the time the roadway was originally designed, or that the continuing absence of guardrails over the years resulted from the City’s periodic review of its decision not to use them in light of experience gaine | 1 | 2000–2000 |
| Ospina v. Department of Corrections, State of Del. green | 1 | 1998–1998 |
| Stipo v. Town of North Castle green | 1 | 1998–1998 |
| Paskiewicz v. National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People green | 1 | 1997–1997 |
| Hollander v. Cayton green | 1 | 1996–1996 |
| Kamerman v. Kolt green | 1 | 1996–1996 |
| Israel v. Wood Dolson Co. green | 1 | 1996–1996 |
| Oram v. Capone green | 1 | 1994–1994 |
| John W. Lovell Co. v. Houghton green | 1 | 1990–1990 |
| Medallion Chemical Corp. v. Chemical Resources, Inc. green | 1 | 1985–1985 |
| O'Rorke v. Carpenter neutral | 1 | 1985–1985 |
| Wells v. Belstrat Hotel Corp. green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Duffy v. Kipers green | 1 | 1975–1975 |
| Bullville Milk Producers' Ass'n v. Armstrong green | 1 | 1966–1966 |
| Moyle v. Franz neutral | 1 | 1958–1958 |
| Bowsky v. Cimiotti Unhairing Co. neutral | 1 | 1958–1958 |
| Miodownick v. Fischman neutral | 1 | 1958–1958 |
| Peeples v. State neutral | 1 | 1947–1947 |
| Byam v. . Collins green | 1 | 1947–1947 |
| Hamilton v. . Eno green | 1 | 1945–1945 |
| Cook v. . Whipple green | 1 | 1944–1944 |
| Wright v. . Wright neutral | 1 | 1944–1944 |
| The Oneida Bank v. . the Ontario Bank green | 1 | 1944–1944 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.